Youth cyber dating abuse: A meta-analysis of risk and protective factors
Open accessAbstract
Cyber Dating Abuse (CDA) has been identified as a prevalent and negative experience for youth, which highlights the need to identify the factors associated with the occurrence of this phenomenon. Thus, this meta-analysis aims to determine the factors associated with youth CDA perpetration and victimization, identifying which of the factors present the strongest risk and protective effects. We identified 16 studies and 17 independent samples, including a total sample of 12,760 adolescents and young adults. Results showed that individual and intimate relation factors were related to both CDA perpetration and victimization, and peer factors were significantly associated with CDA perpetration; individual sociodemographic factors were unrelated to CDA. Findings from this meta-analysis provide valuable evidence to develop CDA prevention and intervention strategies.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Strong family relationships have a small positive correlation with reduced risk of cyberbullying victimization.
“Nine meta-analyses indicate a small positive correlation between strong family relationships and a reduced risk of cyberbullying victimization28,37,64,67,73,99,103,104,123.”
From Umbrella review of meta-analyses on the risk factors, protective factors, consequences and interventions of cyberbullying victimization (2024) · cites this paper as [64]
The Discussion (page unavailable) says protective factors were not analyzed for cyber dating abuse victimization because only one study included them. This paper therefore does not report the claimed correlation between strong family relationships and reduced victimization risk; it also studies cyber dating abuse, not cyberbullying generally. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredNegative relationships with intimate partners significantly increase the risk of cyberbullying victimization to a small extent.
“Results from three meta-analyses indicate that negative relationships with intimate partners significantly increase the risk of cyberbullying victimization to a small extent64,67,107.”
From Umbrella review of meta-analyses on the risk factors, protective factors, consequences and interventions of cyberbullying victimization (2024) · cites this paper as [64]
The Risk and Protective Factors of CDA Victimization section reports a statistically significant but small association (r = .06) between intimate-relationship risk factors, such as violence, and cyber dating abuse victimization. The claim extends this finding to cyberbullying victimization generally and says those relationships increase risk, whereas the paper reports an association specifically within dating relationships. (LLM, conf=0.87)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe higher prevalence of cyber-control behaviors in adolescent couples, compared to cyber-aggressions, could contribute to normalizing these online behaviors and having a greater tolerance to them.
“The higher prevalence of cyber-control behaviors in adolescent couples, compared to cyber-aggressions”
From Romantic myths and cyber dating violence victimization in Spanish adolescents: A moderated mediation model (2023) · cites this paper as Caridade & Braga, 2020
The Introduction distinguishes online control or monitoring from cyber aggression, and the Discussion reports an association between peer approval of cyber dating abuse and its perpetration. But our copy does not establish that control behaviors are more prevalent than cyber-aggressions in adolescent couples, or that their prevalence leads to normalization or greater tolerance. (LLM, conf=0.76)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredUnregulated family and school climates, as well as unrestricted internet use, were prominent contextual risk factors associated with cyberbullying victimization.
“Unregulated family and school climates, as well as unrestricted internet use, were prominent contextual risk factors associated with cyberbullying victimization64,71–73.”
From Umbrella review of meta-analyses on the risk factors, protective factors, consequences and interventions of cyberbullying victimization (2024) · cites this paper as [64]
The Independent Variables and Discussion sections address risk factors for youth cyber dating abuse, not cyberbullying victimization; the Discussion says there were too few studies to analyze other relational risk factors for dating-abuse victimization. Searches for school climate, family environment, and unrestricted internet use found no passage linking those conditions to cyberbullying victimization. The indexed passages provide no page numbers. (LLM, conf=0.76)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredFemales, compared with males, are at a slightly higher risk of cyberbullying victimization.
“Meta-analyses consistently show that females (versus males) are at a slightly higher risk of cyberbullying victimization37,64–66,103,107,117.”
From Umbrella review of meta-analyses on the risk factors, protective factors, consequences and interventions of cyberbullying victimization (2024) · cites this paper as [64]
The paper analyzes cyber dating abuse, not cyberbullying victimization. Its Results section (“Risk and Protective Factors of CDA Victimization,” page unavailable) finds no significant association with sex, and the Discussion (page unavailable) says girls and boys are not at different risk of experiencing cyber dating abuse. Neither passage establishes whether females have a slightly higher risk of cyberbullying victimization. (LLM, conf=0.76)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Age has a nonlinear relationship with cyberbullying victimization, with victimization rates increasing with age but only until adulthood.
“Existing findings indicate a nonlinear relationship between age and cyberbullying victimization, with victimization rates increasing with age28,37,67,117,123 but only until adulthood64.”
From Umbrella review of meta-analyses on the risk factors, protective factors, consequences and interventions of cyberbullying victimization (2024) · cites this paper as [64]
The Discussion (page unavailable) concludes that age was not associated with youth cyber dating abuse victimization. The paper distinguishes that outcome from cyberbullying and excludes studies of adults (Data Analysis, page unavailable), so it cannot establish whether cyberbullying victimization rises with age only until adulthood. (LLM, conf=0.76)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 82 · Cited by 76
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. A. (1998). The ecology of human developmental processes. In W. Damon & N. Eisenberg (Eds.), The handbook of child psychology (3rd ed., pp. 993-1027).
- Caridade, S. (2018). Violência no namoro: Contextualização teórica e empírica [Dating violence: Theoretical and empirical contextualization]. In S. Neves & A. Correia (Eds.), Violências no Namoro [Dating violence] (pp. 9-40).
- Flach, R. M. D., & Deslandes, S. F. (2017). Abuso digital nos relacionamentos afetivo-sexuais: uma análise bibliográfica [Cyber dating abuse in affective and sexual relationships: a literature review]. Reports in Public Health 33(7), Article e00138516. http://cadernos.ensp.fiocruz.br/csp/artigo/162/abuso-digital-nos- relacionamentos-afetivo-sexuais-uma-analise-bibliografica
- VV-D-12-00163R1 · DOI · Paper page
- Jiménez, S., Muñoz-Fernández, V., Lucio López, L. A., & Ortega-Ruíz, R. (2017). Ciberagresión en parejas adolescentes: Un estudio transcultural España-México [Cyber-aggression in adolescent couples: A cross-cultural study Spain-Mexico]. Revista Mexicana de Psicología, 34(1), 46-54.
- Quesada, S., Fernández-González, L., & Calvete, E. (2018). El sexteo (sexting) en la adolescência: Frecuencia y asociación com la victimización de ciberacoso y violência en el noviazgo [The sex (sexting) in adolescence: Frequency and association with the victimization of cyber crime and violence in the news]. Behavioral Psychology, 26(2), 225-242.
- Authors
- Caridade, S. M. M., & Braga, T.
- Affiliations
- Fernando Pessoa University (PT)
- Venue
- Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace
- Publisher
- Masaryk University Press
- Published
- 2020-08-10
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 3
- ISSN
- 1802-7962 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3047820249
- Cited by
- 76
- References
- 82
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 7
- FWCI
- 1.45
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by-nc-nd
- Locations
- Cyberpsychology Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Health › Intimate Partner and Family Violence
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Stalking, Cyberstalking, and Harassment
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Bullying, Victimization, and Aggression
- Keywords
- cyber dating abuse, cyberbullying, adolescents, young adults, risk factors, protective factors, perpetration, victimization, peer factors, intimate relationships, sociodemographic factors, prevention
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
